pnwmom
pnwmom's JournalAlmost done in CA! Hillary ahead by 364K votes with less than 9,000 left uncounted,
for a 7% lead.
Most of the remaining are mail-in votes, not provisionals.
http://vote.sos.ca.gov/returns/president/party/democratic/
http://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/statewide-elections/2016-primary/unprocessed-ballots-report.pdf
When Karl Rove deleted 22 million White House emails and the media yawned.
Remember the US attorney scandal in 2007, when 22 million emails were deleted?
The indictment fairy never appeared, and the media barely woke out of its usual slumber.
http://www.pensitoreview.com/2015/03/18/flashback-rove-erases-22-million-white-house-emails-on-private-server-at-height-of-u-s-attorney-scandal-media-yawns/
Now that they’ve taken control of Congress, Republicans are wielding power much the same way they did in the Clinton era and for the six years afterward when they controlled the White House and Congress under George W. Bush: ineptly — ex. 1, 2, 3, etc.
Then as now, it’s clear that the only thing Republicans do very well is inflame the media with bogus scandals — which is a handy way to distract attention from their ineptitude. They are doing this with their usual aplomb, and considerable success, in the matter of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private server to send emails.
Clinton has said she deleted about 50,000 emails that dealt with personal matters, citing her daughter’s wedding and her mother’s funeral as examples. All the correspondence pertaining to official business was turned over to and archived by State. The deletion of the emails, though perfectly legal, has excited House Republicans, including Speaker John Boehner, who has announced plans to deploy House committees to investigate what might aptly be called Servergate.
Never mind that former Secretary of State Colin Powell, a Republican, has said he used a system similar to Clinton’s — and never mind that in 2007 Karl Rove deleted 22 million emails from a private server in the Bush White House — a matter about which the Beltway media said little and Republicans in Congress, like Rep. John Boehner, said nothing.
SNIP
Back in March this law professor explained there would be no indictment fairy,
because no criminal law applied to her circumstances and no comparable cases had ever been prosecuted.
http://prospect.org/article/why-hillary-wont-be-indicted-and-shouldnt-be-objective-legal-analysis
Why Hillary Won't Be Indicted and Shouldn't Be: An Objective Legal Analysis
There is no reason to think that Clinton committed any crimes with respect to the use of her email server.
Richard O. Lempert (University of Michigan School of Law)
March 20, 2016
News reports suggest that the FBI is nearing the end of its inquiry into the legal issues surrounding Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal server for government emails and into the legal ramifications of classified information found in messages to and from her. Most of the reporting—and virtually all political discussion—reads as if reporters and pundits know little about the rules regarding the classification of information and what they imply not just for the likelihood of a Clinton indictment but also for whether she violated other rules regarding the proper handling of classified information, whether or not the violations constitute crimes.
What follows reflects the knowledge and experience I have gained from working at the Department of Homeland Security from 2008 until 2011. While there, I took the lead in drafting a security classification manual for one of the divisions of the DHS science and technology directorate. In this discussion, I offer answers to questions about the former secretary of state’s email that have not been frequently asked, but should be.
What constitutes criminal conduct with respect to the disclosure of classified information?
Relevant law is found in several statutes. To begin with, 18 USC, Section 798 provides in salient part: “Whoever knowingly and willfully … [discloses] or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety and interest of the United States [certain categories of classified information] … shall be fined … or imprisoned.”
The most important words in this statute are the ones I have italicized. To violate this statute, Secretary Clinton would have had to know that she was dealing with classified information, and either that she was disclosing it to people who could not be trusted to protect the interests of the United States or that she was handling it in a way (e.g. by not keeping it adequately secure) that was at least arguably prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States.
SNIP
CA update: Hillary ahead, 387K votes. Total uncounted (all parties) 147K.
http://vote.sos.ca.gov/returns/president/party/democratic/http://elections.cdn.sos.ca.gov/statewide-elections/2016-primary/unprocessed-ballots-report.pdf
Carol Browner: "Accusations that the Clinton Campaign isn't serious about climate change
are absurd."
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/06/democratic-party-platform-debate-hillary-clinton-213998
Last Friday, the drafting committee met in St. Louis to debate amendments to this platform. We worked together to create a draft that was even stronger than it had been that morning, with new shared goals and ideas. As a representative of Clinton’s campaign, I was proud that we came together as Democrats to articulate the boldest climate vision ever to appear in our party’s platform. And the allegation that the Clinton team is not fully committed to solving climate change is absurd.
Here’s what happened: The Sanders campaign’s representatives put forward nine amendments on climate and energy. We worked together to turn four into “unity amendments” representing common ground, including an amendment opposing utilities’ efforts to undermine renewables; an amendment asking the Department of Justice to investigate whether fossil fuel companies misled their shareholders; and a bold commitment to power our economy with 100 percent clean energy by mid-century. As a regular bicyclist—and the daughter of a pedestrian who was killed on a residential street—I was pleased to support the amendment Sanders representative Bill McKibben introduced to strengthen bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure.
SNIP
But debating the merits of different policy solutions is quite different from setting up a litmus test for what it takes to be “serious” about climate change. And that is what the Sanders campaign and its representatives have done, claiming that the Democratic platform falls short because it does not include their preferred amendments to enact a carbon tax and immediately ban all oil and gas production through hydraulic fracturing.
If we were to accept that a carbon tax and a fracking ban are the only “right” policies, every state that we consider a climate leader would fail the test. California has some of the most ambitious climate targets in the country, with a governor and state legislature that support climate action. But as the pioneering chair of their Air Resources Board, Mary Nichols, told our committee, California uses a range of standards, incentives and other tools to meet its climate targets—because that is what the state’s leaders find most effective. They have decided to regulate fracking, rather than ban it outright. They put a price on carbon, but through a cap-and-trade program, not a carbon tax. Even Sanders’ home state of Vermont does not have a carbon tax.
In short, we have more than two tools at hand. And it's a good thing, because there is no single, magic lever that will solve this crisis. Climate change will impact every corner of our country and every sector of our economy. It will affect everything from our national security to our children’s health. There are no simple solutions to challenges as complex as this one.
A loophole in the alert/jury system..
Videos can't be viewed when alerted on.
I was a juror on a post that included a video. I couldn't look at the video because that would have led me offsite, and the only way to do that was to discontinue my service on the jury.
People shouldn't be able to post material through videos that they would be barred from posting in written form.
Newt, potential VP pick, suggests Trump's candidacy may not be "alive" in October.
Doesn't sound like much of a vote of confidence. What a wonderful surrogate Newt would be!
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/newt-gingrich-says-donald-trump-not-trying-yet-n603036
"Everything the Clinton campaign is doing to suppress Trump will, in the short run, suppress Trump — because he's not trying," the former speaker of the House said.
"The thing she's got to worry about is if he is still alive as a candidate on the first of October," Gingrich continued.
Epstein employee swears she personally witnessed Trump forcibly rape a 13 year old
and personally witnessed Trump threaten the lives of the girl and her family.
The employee said that witnessing these encounters was a part of her job as a "party planner."
"Tiffany Doe," under penalty of perjury, has signed an affidavit to that effect, according to an article in Huff Post by an NBC legal analyst, Lisa Bloom.
This is the alleged legal affidavit (the 2 page document that follows the lawsuit)
https://www.scribd.com/doc/316341058/Donald-Trump-Jeffrey-Epstein-Rape-Lawsuit-and-Affidavits#fullscreen?platform=hootsuite
This is Lisa Bloom's Huff Post piece.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lisa-bloom/why-the-new-child-rape-ca_b_10619944.html
The Twit's funniest tweet. Here's my nomination. What's yours?
https://twitter.com/mcdonaldjtrump/status/640698884998590464My grandparents didn't come to America all the way from Germany to see it get taken over by immigrants. Not on my watch.
Profile Information
Member since: Mon Jan 30, 2006, 06:07 PMNumber of posts: 108,973
